DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR HUF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SLP (C) No. 15345 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 15347 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 26533 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30127 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30190 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30199 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30201 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30202 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30207 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 30208 of 2015, SLP(C) No. 8796 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 8987 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 9179 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 10167 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 11394 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 24320 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 28271 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 28283 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38281 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38282 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38285 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38293 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38294 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38306 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38347 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38350 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 38369 of 2016, SLP(C) No. 1778 of 2017

(2.) Post after the Reference to the larger Bench dated 12.01.2016, regarding the effect of the stay operating, which prevented the DDA/NCT from taking possession, is answered by the larger Bench. SLP (C) No. 15346 of 2015 (Item No. 15)

(3.) We are informed that despite vacation of stay in the year 2010, so far no compensation has been paid.